Judges Decline To Open Records

May 11, 2005|By DAVE ALTIMARI; Courant Staff Writer

A three-judge panel has ruled that the records of the grand jury that investigated potential criminal wrongdoing in the failed $220 million deal between the Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority and Enron will remain secret.

The Courant had filed a request to make the records, including transcripts of interviews, public to better evaluate Judge Patrick Carroll's findings that not enough evidence was presented to show crimes had occurred.

The ruling means the testimony of former Gov. John G. Rowland and 62 other witnesses will remain sealed. Rowland had testified before Carroll at a secret location in Newington in January 2004. In his testimony, sources said, Rowland admitted that he ``probably'' talked with Enron Corp. CEO Kenneth Lay in the fall of 2001 before the deal was approved. When the deal originally collapsed, Rowland denied ever talking to Lay.

The three judges, Roland Fasano, Jonathan Silbert and Julia Dewey, held an unusual hearing on the Courant's request to unseal the grand jury records in March. In making their decision, they quoted cases ranging from the 1950s McCarthy hearings to Kenneth Starr's investigation into President Clinton.

The Courant's attorney, William Fish, had argued it was in the public's best interests to release the documents so that the public could get a full accounting of how state officials made the costly deal.

But the judges rejected the argument, saying that disclosure of the records could seriously hinder future grand juries because witnesses might be reluctant to testify for fear that what they said would eventually be released to the press. The judges said releasing the testimony of witnesses after the grand juror had promised them secrecy would make the process a ``sham.''

``Disclosure under the circumstances ... could cripple the entire investigatory grand jury process, whose future capacity to investigate allegations of official corruption and similar offenses would be severely compromised,'' the judges wrote.

The judges also noted that under a 1985 law any allegation of corruption or wrongdoing by individuals that is not proven would be exempt from disclosure, leaving only ``non-incriminating, but nonetheless potentially embarrassing testimony of innocent parties who came forward with assurances of secrecy and confidentiality.''

The Courant said it would not appeal the decision.

Chief State's Attorney Christopher Morano, whose office conducted the investigation, had written a letter to the panel indicating he had no objection to the record being made public. But the judges dismissed his input.